This upsets the ancap

This upsets the ancap

Other urls found in this thread:

mises.org/system/tdf/9_2_5_0.pdf?file=1&type=document
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Except the peasants were bound to the land and unallowed to leave. If the peasants had been allowed to leave, thus forcing the feudal lords to compete for their labor, thus giving the peasants better living conditions, then you might have a point.

Most ancaps (on Sup Forums anyway) seem to agree with Hoppe that the monarchist tradition of paying rent to a king who manages property is a superior way to manage land and government. Their main gripe seems to be that they'd rather have it more decentralized (more kings, more fiefdoms = more options) than, say, the Roman or Mongol Empires would have allowed.

>my deed my land
my gun my life
my cock my wife
THE ANCAP CREED
you're just a jealous faggot because you don't have the balls to work for everything you have

kek
truly cancer ancaps are

>logical fallacies, ahoy!

...

*

I've thought about it recently too. Would work except land lords can evict people but they don't have monopoly right to imprison you (jail time for crimes). Need something else to permit enforcing laws beyond eviction.

Could have adults sign enforcement contracts or evicted. And parents are required to enforce on their kids until they are 18. Then at 18 you either sign or go to another country.

Would also have to be a natural homesteading limit on land ownership by one person; meaning more local lords and barons. Having a king as a uniting factor for common defense.

Shit, now I'm neo-reactionary and would rather see a return to the medieval system.

Ancaps don't think that the first person to see the Continent can say "that's mine" and take it all.

Monarchy is literally end stage ancap.
Idiots don't seem to realize that anarcho-anything is only ever transitional

this desu
Monarchy is better than Democracy by this perspective because in Monarchy at least 1 guy is guaranteed to not have his property violated

Banishment used to be a thing.
If you break the laws (violate the NAP or the landlord's rules) they kick you the Fuck out and kill you if you come back

stupid commie

I'm more partial to city states as they originally were. Basically governments don't use money, they get everything they need by distributing obligations in exchange for rights and privileges. For example to have the right to own land you must agree to serve in the army.

...

You're the king? Well I didn't vote for you

>ancap not getting it
imagine my shock

muh evil coorperation oppressing the people run by people for the people of the people by the top people in the EVIL COOPERATION. EVIL EVIL EVIL.
Money=Evil

>2002
Spotted the commie

...

He's literally right though. Living rent-free on MY land is unacceptable.

...

A monarch will also have to think about the consequences for his heirs.

this is now a gadsen thread

...

Real question. How are land "rights" determined in an ancap society. Alright it is easy to see why your house and surrounding property belong to you, but how would large purchases of land work? Could anyone just stand in a field and claim it it belongs to them? If there is no government to auction off land who would?

This is why ancap are retarded. a libertarian nightwatchman state is the right amount of government.

...

Got any more info on city states and their political organisation?

this doesn't really upset me

...

Could you imagine the bidding process?

>20 bags of potatoes!
>do I have any other offers?
>7 soviet era AKs!

biggest argument against monarchies is Europe's own downfall

Hoppe is a hack fraud

But this is exactly the problem with capitalism. Under capitalism you can earn money simply by owning property (and not working). Capitalism is literally the only economic system that guarantees people the possibility of earning money without working.

...

L.O.L.

Based O.P.

...

>What stopping you
Nothing you fucking statist. We already did.

...

...

...

In your opinion, they support a monarchist tradition, user. What would they say if the king wants to establish a religion in order to increase the stability in his kingdom?

...

...

Libertarians thing that people are good, and should be left to their own devices
Statists think that people are evil, and should be controlled under fear of death.

...

That only worked because there were only a few million people and lots and lots of empty space everywhere to banish them to.

How do ancaps handle prisons?

>commie does not realize the concept of property
Ancap adheres to the Lockean theory of private property. It says the right of ownership comes only after mixing one's labor with wild resource and transforming it to something useful. Wild land can not be owned. Feud's and commiestate's claims of ownership were unjustified.

If your are a marxist, consider reading the article "Marxist and Austrian Class Analysis" where professor Hoppe argues that exploitation shall be defined as "obtaining property in non productive and non contractual way". Unlike Marx's, this definition fits to any century. Violation of this rule leads to exploitation.
mises.org/system/tdf/9_2_5_0.pdf?file=1&type=document

Divine monarchy is the answer

...

its simple. we will the bourgeoisie

its simple, we kill the bourgeoisie

...

holy fuck that is hilarious (and sad)

...

>How do ancaps handle prisons?
As commercial institutions where prisoners have to work to get daily meal and keeped until they pay out the compensation to a victim.

Kek'd

Where is the authority derived to capture, detain, convict and imprison someone?

Do you ever get tired of shilling this crap?

>nightwatchman state is the right amount of government.
And who would restrain this state from growing as the US did since 19 century?

All time favorite

...

Maybe I will have my own country. Does this violate the NAP?

They don't want to consider this because that means investing in a system and they want to play the parasite.

A constitution, like ours but we'd be even more explicit what the government may not do. But government will grow anyways, you can only do your best to slow and restrain it. There is no system that completely stops government growth. It's taken ~240 years to fuck up a beautiful country and system. Maybe the next time we can hit 1000 years.

>Tfw you will never know the perfect merciful swiftness of a guillotine death

>the united states was fine up until last year
user...

...

>how would large purchases of land work?
Societies has always managed to develop institutions to register important agreements. Marriage ceremony is the way to make neighbors and relatives remember the marriage contract. Church also kept records. And for now people have developed the blockchain which is a registry.

>If there is no government to auction off land who would?
You don't need auction. Just take land for free and use it.

...

kek

...

...

This; the blockchain is the perfect technology to record property transfers without a government. Pre-mine the entirety of the coin, assign each coin to a property and thus the original owner, and when the owner transfers property to a new wallet address the blockchain reflects the sale of that property and the new title holder is recorded in the blockchain.

I think you should go into one of these "take a test to determine what kind of politics or philosophy you have" threads when they come about here and realise that lots of libertarian types here have no concern about religious and moral traditions, and beacause those are integral to functional ethnicities, now you can understand why libertarian and An.-Caps. get laughed out of the place so often. You might have the right answer here, but the others want no part in such loyalty (instead they want to play the parasite).

um no i own my property, this is what america was basically founded on.

Trips

Rights don't exist.

I'll admit, Intellectuals and Society makes some pretty good arguments, for jungle bunny literature.

Who would enforce the institution? Who would make the judgement if it was violated or not? Both this functions belong to state police and state court. People themselves will not organise fast enough to fight the violation. They have other business to do, than to defend some gays... some rich businessmen, some media owners, some gun owners. And in the end you find out there is no one left to stand with you.

The only way to restrain government is competition. When countries have to compete with each other, they lower taxes to attract investment.

>religious and moral traditions
>integral to functional ethnicities
>thinks of himself as "white"
>56%
Who gets laughed out of the place so often again?

>Conductor we have double trips!

...

This; if monopolies are bad for business and social wellness everywhere else, then why does the government get a monopoly on making and enforcing laws and regulations and collecting taxes to do so? Why not be able to choose between McGovernment, Government Lite, I can't believe it's not government, and Government Black, Red, and Blue labels?

Ah that's the only thing I've picked up from him outside of excerpts or articles and I thought it came off as whiney and obviously one sided. I disagree with him on most things but he's as articulate as it comes for the points he is trying to make. I question his authenticity.

>lots of libertarian types here have no concern about religious and moral traditions
I don't have it too. This is outdated shit mostly usless in the modern world.

> literally did not google night-watchman state

...

>Where is the authority derived to capture, detain, convict and imprison someone?
It is derived from the right to selfdefense, that a victim delegates to his relatives, friends and protection agency.

...

...

oh my god you lot really are retarded arent you?

people being greedy would incentivise them to compete with a monopoly.

> parents shouldn't have a monopoly on children, they should compete in the open market for parental rights with strange men who own ice cream trucks

Don't let in blacks and don't let women vote. That would have solved the government growth question.

Why do you need a state for military, the police, and courts?
>military
US military operations routinely involve private contractors now. Private contractors have more incentive to keep soldiers alive and to choose less risky field maneuvers because they literally have to pay for every death and loss of equipment. Private contractors are easier to control because there is no governmental immunity from being sued, and private contractors are more likely to be governed better because the commander-in-chief isn't decided by blockheads voting for more gibs.
>police
Overlaps strongly with the above with more emphasis placed on the ability to sue for misconduct. Also, private police are less likely to focus on stupid shit like enforcing minor traffic laws because they aren't paid from tickets, rather they're paid based from insurance premiums based on preventing crime - the lower the rate of crime and better police enforcement, the more free lunch McPolice get to collect. This also dovetails quite nicely with the protection and enforcement of property rights, because trespassers are the first step to crime.
>courts
Courts can be constructed through contractual agreements and insurance companies, in the sense that in order for you to get a certain insurance policy you need to contractually bind yourself to following a certain set of laws, and the proceeds from your insurance payments pay to keep the court functioning when there are disputes.

>makes an appeal to emotions
Every contract is an agreement for both parties to surrender some of their rights. Usually property rights, but not limited to.

The fact of dating assumes that you agreed to surrender you right to fuck others. If you do it, you violate the terms of the "contract". You should first dissolve the agreement before dating them.

...